Hard to follow the logic here. Are we saying that institutional shareholders with excess allotment sold some now, and hence will not do so at the end of lockout periods? That's a hell of a price to pay for loss of liquidity as insiders (like employees & management) sell in droves at the end of the lockout....

3:06 am May 24, 2012

Setu wrote:

What convoluted logic. This article is clearly an orchestrated attempt to give the facebook IPO fiasco a new 'make over'.

C'mon, are you cliaming that just because the early angel investors and institutional holders volunteered to sell PART of their holdings at IPO, the stock price will NOT be depressed when over 1 Billion stocks get unloaded on to the market by employees and insiders when the lockup period expries in the next 90 to 180 days?

As has been reported lately, the wall street institutions were told days before the IPO that Facebook revenues were lagging the amounts earlier projected. Which means that they expect the stock price to not hold up when reality hits. Given this new awareness, the institutions including the underwriters to the issue (JPM, MS, GS) wanted to cash out their shares as much as possible instead of holding on to them as they get depressed when the quarterly financial reports are announced in July.

So naturally GS, JPM, MS leaned heavy on Ebersman and told him that rather than hold on to devaluing paper stock, they want out right off the bat when the IPO happens...so they get to cash out at 40 or 42 or who knows even higher should the mainstreet doofus' fall for the hype and stampede for the FB stocks.

Now while the logic of the wall street firms makes sense, why would Facebook CFO allow them to go ahead and unload a bigger chunk of their shares during the IPO? Well, the real reason CFO Ebersman went along and allowed the institutionals to unload a bigger chunk of their FB stock on mainstreet doofus' is because Facebook paid VERY LITTLE to MS, GS, JPM by way of cash for their sevices as underwriters. They got away with paying more, by paying in Facebook shares to GS, JPM, MS. That being the case, when these fat cats realized that the FB stock would lose value given the new revelations about slowing FB revenue, the fat cats told Ebersman....'Enough is enough. Alright you paid us less in cash for underwriting this IPO. So allow us to sell the millions of FB stock we have. That would ensure that we get away with something before this think devalues or tanks. Else you can keep the FB shares, just pay us several more hundred millions in cash'.

That did it. Ebersman played along and told the fatcats to go ahead and dump a bigger load of their stocks during the IPO. They liekly unloaded at 42.

4:40 am May 24, 2012

Nah wrote:

ATTENTION: Mr. Murphy!

How much did FB and Ebersman pay you do write such an endorsing editorial?

All seed investors GTFO and cash out when a stock goes public! Why would they stick around and why would they lend/risk their money for FUN?

You picked one small opinion to blanket the factual FB IPO CLUSTER SNAFU!

David Ebersman Messed up big time, not Morgan Stanley! He must Resign!

12:53 am May 25, 2012

Chris Lesperance wrote:

They were talking about the same kind of stuff on I guess it is David Ebersman's website but I don't know who writes for it at davidebersman.com

Add a Comment

Error message

Name

We welcome thoughtful comments from readers. Please comply with our guidelines. Our blogs do not require the use of your real name.